Army Corps submits draft impact statement for Alaska gas ‘bullet’ pipeline

FAIRBANKS, Alaska - The Army Corps of Engineers has submitted a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to the federal Environmental Protection Agency for a proposed 737-mile gas pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to Cook Inlet.

The small-diameter pipeline, expected to cost $8.4 billion, would be complete by 2019, according to the notice published in the Federal Register on Jan. 20.

The Alaska Stand Alone Pipeline (ASAP) will be a 24-inch pipeline running along the Dalton and Parks highways to the coast. It would run to the west of Fairbanks, with a 12-inch spur line from Dunbar to Fairbanks. 

The plan for the pipeline came about from a legislative directive in 2010, and it  has been called everything from a "bullet line" to a "pencil line," the latter term coming from those who say the diameter is too small.

At first, the line would carry up to 250 million cubic feet per day, about half of its ultimate capacity, the report says. Fairbanks would be supplied with 60 million cubic feet per day

EPA plays ‘environmental justice’ card against Keystone XL

HOUSTON, Texas - A proposed pipeline that would ferry Canadian crude oil to Texas refineries has run afoul of the recharged federal push to protect minorities and the poor from an overburden of pollution.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says the plan for construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline doesn't evaluate the potential health impacts on Port Arthur, Texas, where one fork of the pipeline will end.
The criticism reflects new priorities at the EPA under administrator Lisa Jackson, who has intensified its quest for “environmental justice,” a movement rooted in the idea that minorities and the poor bear an unfair share of society's most toxic institutions.

Former EPA official says Corexit, widely used in Gulf spill, kills dolphins, humans

EPA whistleblower Hugh Kaufman recently spoke on Democracy Now about BP’s claims regarding Corexit and the effects it is having on the Gulf of Mexico and the life forms that it comes in contact with.
He alleges that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is covering up the toxic effects that will result from using nearly two million gallons of the chemical dispersant since the start of the catastrophic oil spill in the U.S. Gulf.
Hugh Kaufman is a former U.S. Air Force captain. He joined the EPA in
1971. He helped write the laws that are on the federal books regarding the disposal, storage, handling and treatment of solid and hazardous waste. Though the EPA has approved the use of Corexit as an oil dispersant, Kaufman alleges that it is extremely toxic, dangerous and shows proof that the chemical was linked to many health problems when used in the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
Kaufman also believes that BP used the chemical dispersant to dissolve as much oil as possible to prevent the public from ever truly knowing how vast the spill actually is.
Kaufman also alleges that people who are currently coming in contact with Corexit are suffering internal bleeding and hemorrhaging.
In a video clip, Kaufman says "...Consequently, we have people, wildlife… we have dolphins that are hemorrhaging. People who work near it are hemorrhaging internally. And that's what dispersants are supposed to do. EPA now is taking the position that they really don't know how dangerous it is, even though if you read the label, it tells you how dangerous it is. And, for example, in the Exxon Valdez case, people who worked with dispersants, most of them are dead now. The average death age is around fifty. It's very dangerous, and it's an… economic protector of BP, not an environmental protector of the public."

EPA slams State Department DEIS for Keystone XL, recommends delay in approval

WASHINGTON – In a politically astute move that was widely anticipated, the Environmental Protection Agency in a July 6 letter took the U.S. State Department off the hook by recommending a delay in approval of construction of TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL crude oil pipeline.
If the State Department accepts the recommendation, it can delay a decision on the controversial pipeline until after fall elections.
In recommending a delay in approval, the Environmental Protection Agency said the draft environmental impact study for TransCanada Corp.'s proposed oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is inadequate and should be revised.
Keystone XL would move bitumen from Alberta, Canada, down through Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska in the upper Great Plains. It would then merge with the Keystone pipeline under construction in Kansas before splitting off again to pass through Oklahoma to end at the largest U.S. refining complex in Texas and the Gulf of Mexico.
Environmental groups have raised concerns that the pipeline could pollute air and water supplies and harm migratory birds and other wildlife. They have also speculated about what they consider inadequate pipeline safety and emergency spill response.
In a letter to the State Department, EPA's assistant administrator for enforcement and compliance assurance, Cynthia Giles, said the draft environmental impact statement failed to adequately address those concerns.
The impact from "air emissions from refineries and the potential contamination of drinking water supplies from an oil spill have not been fully evaluated," Giles said in the letter.
She also said the study also does not "evaluate the environmental justice issues associated with potential impacts to communities in Port Arthur, Texas, where numerous industrial facilities, including chemical plants and a hazardous waste incinerator, are contributing to the residents' overall exposure to contaminants."
The agency said the State Department should revise the study and open it up for more public comment.
TransCanada spokesman Terry Cunha said the company disagrees and that the State Department "did a thorough and complete job in preparing the Draft EIS."
He said TransCanada looked "forward to the environmental review process continuing through DOS's review of comments and preparation of the Final EIS."
The EPA sent its report to the State Department, which has to approve the pipeline because it crosses an international border.
The State Department is reviewing comments from eight agencies on the draft environmental report. The public comment period on the current draft document ended July 2.
"The State Department seriously considers all public comments received as part of the public comment process. However, we will not have a detailed response until we complete the review process," State Department spokeswoman Jill W. Dietrich said in an e-mail.
Keystone XL will move diluted bitumen from Alberta, Canada, down through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska in the upper Great Plains, and then from Oklahoma to Texas and into the Gulf of Mexico. Under its planned route, the pipeline would cross several rivers and aquifers, including the Ogallala aquifer which supplies water to several Midwestern states.
TransCanada has said the pipeline would provide a reliable source of oil to the U.S. from a stable trading partner and would not adversely affect the environment.
Cunha has said construction of Keystone XL should provide more than $20 billion in new spending to the U.S. economy and more than $585 million in state and local taxes in states along the pipeline route.
Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, director of international programs for the National Resources Defense Council, said the environmental advocacy group was "happy to see how seriously EPA was taking the environmental and public health concerns around the pipeline," and said other pipelines have not undergone such scrutiny.
Keystone has already won approval for pipelines that move oil from Canada through the Dakotas, Nebraska and Missouri to Illinois, as well as for the section being built in Kansas.
"But of course... the first Keystone was under the Bush administration, and the goal of the Bush administration was to push it through as quickly as possible," she said.
She said NRDC has asked the State Department to release correspondence from other federal agencies that have responded to the Keystone XL proposal but had not seen any of those.
EPA gave the State Department’s draft EIS its lowest possible rating. EPA recommended that the State Department provide new analysis and information in a revised draft environmental impact statement that will circulate for public review. This means additional time for analysis and reflection. EPA also says that the proposal is a potential candidate for referral to the White House Council on Environmental Quality - the office responsible for developing recommendations when there are disagreements among agencies.

EPA orders Caribbean Petroleum to resume cleanup in Puerto Rico

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said on Feb. 25 that it has ordered Caribbean Petroleum Refinery L.P. (CAPECO) to resume cleanup work in the aftermath of the October 2009 explosion and fire at it's facility in Bayamon, Puerto Rico.

A week earlier, contractors hired by CAPECO to perform cleanup actions walked off the job. That is the second time a contractor has quit work at the site, and EPA is ordering the company to address the situation. EPA will continue to provide oversight of the work being conducted by CAPECO's contractor at the property.

“The explosion, two-day long fire and subsequent oil spill at CAPECO's petroleum tank farm created a dangerous situation that impacted the adjacent wetlands and water bodies; the environmental impacts continue to pose a threat to human health and the environment,” EPA said.

"This facility is right in the middle of a densely populated community and it is very important that this cleanup continue," said Judith Enck, EPA Regional Administrator. "This work, performed under EPA's watchful eye, is critical to protecting the health and safety of nearby residents and to restoring the surrounding habitat."

Under an order issued by EPA, CAPECO must restart its work to repair damages at the facility, clean up oil, remove residual oil from damaged storage tanks, and clean up the fuel transfer pipeline. In addition, plans must be developed and implemented to monitor the air, conduct other sampling and analysis, and ensure the site is safe and workers and community members are protected.